Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

As pointed out for underground station, the building outline doesn't always cover the underground levels (i.e. the underground levels can extend far beyond the building limit (and potentially under other buildings/roads...). We find this problem for metro station, train station or other buildings l

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Paul, Your landuse=forestry proposal seems good to me: it is clear enough, and the transition process you describe here seems consistent with what I know about such transitions which already happened. If I understand you, the main problem for landuse=forestry is to include it in the standard st

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 18:14, David Marchal wrote: Your landuse=forestry proposal seems good to me: it is clear enough, and > the transition process you describe here seems consistent with what I know > about such transitions which already happened. If I understand you, the > main problem for lan

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Jan 22, 2019, 8:38 PM by pla16...@gmail.com: > On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 18:14, David Marchal <> pene...@live.fr > > > wrote: > > >> Your landuse=forestry proposal seems good to me: it is clear enough, and the >> transition process you describe here seems consistent with wha

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Jan 21, 2019, 9:44 PM by pla16...@gmail.com: > On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 at 20:21, Warin <> 61sundow...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > >> >> My problem with going to landuse=forestry with natural=wood... >> >> what happens to the remaining landuse=forest? >> Will that fin

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 2:39 PM Paul Allen wrote: > I don't know if they have rejected this specific idea, or even if they were > asked. It's just > that they often require that a tag has been used sufficiently in the wild > before they consider > adding it. A commoner objection is that it's

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Jan 21, 2019, 12:03 AM by 61sundow...@gmail.com: > The end to this madness is for renders to recognise that the landuse=forest > needs to be rendered differently from natural=wood. > The essential difference between the two is that landuse must have some human > benefit, a produce, and a clear w

Re: [Tagging] RfC - tagging whatever power line is isolated as attribute

Jan 21, 2019, 9:22 AM by vosc...@gmail.com: > In the proposal there is a statement: > "it is impossible to check whatever power line is insulated during survey > without closely approaching power line" > I thought, that the distinction is very easy; insulated cables don't need > insulated suspen

Re: [Tagging] defining service on railway=tram

Jan 19, 2019, 9:48 PM by ja...@piorkowski.ca: > Hello, > > First time posting here, forgive if I've missed some rules. > Evertthing is right and welcome! > > Summary: I wanted to refine tagging of some tram/streetcar tracks to > show what they're used for, and found this isn't standardized and

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

As someone who has mapped a lot of landcover & landuse in my local area, I welcome sorting out the confusion that is the current state of natural=wood/landuse=forest. Many parcels around me are managed for forestry purposes but don't have tre

Re: [Tagging] RfC - tagging whatever power line is isolated as attribute

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 20:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > (1) insulated suspension is certainly not visible on aerial images > True. (2) I have no idea what "insulated suspension" is, > googling (using both DuckDuckGo and Google) shows me mostly some bicycle > element > Although I've not enco

Re: [Tagging] RfC - tagging whatever power line is isolated as attribute

Hi, Le mar. 22 janv. 2019 à 21:44, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : > (1) insulated suspension is certainly not visible on aerial images > According to definitions below, even it's not seen from aerial imagery, insulators can be seen from the ground https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

> On Jan 22, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Adam Franco wrote: > > As someone who has mapped a lot of landcover & landuse > in my local area, I > welcome sorting out the confusion that is the current state of > natural=wood/landuse=forest. Many par

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

Jan 11, 2019, 4:29 AM by jo...@mac.com: > I was on the OSM-carto gorup and was **specifically** told to go to the > mailing lists to discuss the creating and modification of tags, as the gitub > discussions were how to implement and render already established tagging > schema.  > It was prob

Re: [Tagging] Trailhead tagging

Jan 11, 2019, 8:43 AM by pelder...@gmail.com: > Analogy is not right. Not tagging all trailheads with this wikipedia > reference, just the specific limited set fitting this specific concept > described on the wikipedia page.  > Any of the existing prefixed keys does not fit either, e.g. brand:wi

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 22/01/2019 10:47, Lionel Giard wrote: > So, i'm really in favor of the level=* for a "data user friendly" tag > (that could correspond to local numbering, but not always) and a special > tag for the local levels. At this moment i would see a *local level tag > *like "level:ref=*" or "loc_level=*

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 21:10, Tod Fitch wrote: Not rendering landuse=forestry on the default OSM map to reduce “tagging > for the renderer” is an interesting idea. I’ll have to think about that but > it does have some appeal. > It doesn't appeal to me. I'd prefer it to render but in a way that

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 07:10, Tod Fitch wrote: > > Perhaps the way forward would be to change the wiki to indicate that > landuse=forest is deprecated due to its confused usage. Add some text to > the page directing mappers to either landcover=trees if they are simply > mapping the presence of tr

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Vr gr Peter Elderson Landcover tag now approaches 100 000 occurrences. Still growing despite not being rendered. I would think rendering the top three landcover values is not out of place. The github issues are still there. Initially: landcover=trees same rendering as natural=wood and landuse=for

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Only about the cited point (/tagging natural forests as natural=wood/), I think a natural forest should be tagged as natural=forest (/quite logically, I would say.../), while natural=wood should be reserved for "small forests" (/which is one of the possible meaning of "wood" in English, if I'm n

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Well, sorry, obviously I did an editing mistake and the "/Wikipedia defines 6 types of forest/" phrase jumped up in the wrong place: it should be just above the dotted list of forest types... Sorry about the confusion... Sergio On 2019-01-23 01:52, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > Only about the cited

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

> the only way I see in the Wiki is to use the leaf_type=* tag You can also use leaf_cycle= to tag deciduous vs evergreen, and also semi-deciduous, semi-evergreen and mixed: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:leaf_cycle This accounts for most types of woodland, along with leaf type. The rest

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Oh, and we shouldn’t forget leaf_type=leafless This is used for cactus and other succulents, and it’s currently rendered by the Openstreetmap-Carto style, for wood and forest. Leaf_cycle is rendered by the Alternative-Colors style mad

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Hi! On 2019-01-23 02:10, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > The one thing that’s missing is a tag for the density of the main vegetation > type; is it a dense canopy of trees, or dense scrubland, verses more widely > spaced. Not only that (and the "leaf cycle" thing): again, a forest is not a bunch of

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

I would be very happy if more mappers start tagging leaf_type and leaf_cycle. Certainly it is possible to add further detail. In temperate regions one could tag the dominant species of tree in woodlands where the majority of trees are one species, eg Ponderosa Pine or Douglas Fir in the western USA

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 11:52, Sergio Manzi wrote: Only about the cited point (/tagging natural forests as natural=wood/), I think a natural forest should be tagged as natural=forest (/quite logically, I would say.../), while natural=wood should be reserved for "small forests" (/which is one of the possi

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 07:31, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 21, 2019, 9:44 PM by pla16...@gmail.com: On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 at 20:21, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: My problem with going to landuse=forestry with natural=wood... what happens to

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 2019-01-23 04:14, Warin wrote: > Temperate and Tropical moist/dry are climates... if those are to be mapped > them go right ahead .. but they are not confined to forests, so should be > mapped separately. Those are simply the names biologists give to that forest types.  E.g. "Tropical moist

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 07:37, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 21, 2019, 12:03 AM by 61sundow...@gmail.com: The end to this madness is for renders to recognise that the landuse=forest needs to be rendered differently from natural=wood. The essential difference between the two is that landuse must h

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:11 PM Simon Poole wrote: > [...] addr tags are for postal addresses I don't think using them as a > level name/ref makes very much sense outside of that very narrow > application. > I rechecked the two main OSM Wiki pages[1][2] on addr:*=* tags and addresses in general

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

> > One reason that's of particular interest to me is that SIT is intended > to be compatible with 3D rendering, allowing for the creation of 3D > models that represent both the inside and outside of buildings at the > same time. > > At the moment, Simple 3D Buildings has no support for "half" leve

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Jan 23, 2019, 4:49 AM by 61sundow...@gmail.com: > On 23/01/19 07:37, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >> Jan 21, 2019, 12:03 AM by >> 61sundow...@gmail.com >> >> : >> >>> The end to this madness is for renders to recognise that the >>> landuse=forest need

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

I think there can be no outcome of any discussion about landuse unless the landcover is separated from the landuse first. I think the only way forward is to actually do that first. The growth of the landcover key shows that many mappers think that it's a good idea to map landcover separately. I w

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Jan 23, 2019, 1:00 AM by pelder...@gmail.com: > > Vr gr Peter Elderson > > Landcover tag now approaches 100 000 occurrences. Still growing despite not > being rendered.  I would think rendering the top three landcover values is > not out of place. The github issues are still there. Initially:

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

The rendering itself is a github issue of course, but it shoud be based on consistent tagging, which is a tagging list concern. I slipped up in the contradicting paragraphs... I meant, an area landCOVER=grass within a landUSE=forest. Main point is, let's recognise / support the growing use of the

[Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Date: Jan 23, 2019, 8:31 AM From: 61sundow...@gmail.com To: matkoni...@tutanota.com Subject: Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map? > On 23/01/19 17:52, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >> >> >> >> Jan 23, 2019, 4:49 AM by >> 61sundow...@gmail.com >>

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 18:37, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Date: Jan 23, 2019, 8:31 AM From: 61sundow...@gmail.com To: matkoni...@tutanota.com Subject: Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map? On 23/01/19 17:52, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 23, 2019, 4:49 A

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 18:25, Peter Elderson wrote: The rendering itself is a github issue of course, but it shoud be based on consistent tagging, which is a tagging list concern. I slipped up in the contradicting paragraphs... I meant, an area landCOVER=grass within a landUSE=forest. Main point is, le

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

And where do you put the name of the forest/wood ? On the MP or on the outer way ? I would think on the outer way, as the scrub is part of the named area. But then I have an outer way with only a name tag. Is that correct ? m. On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 8:51 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: